[Community] review of depmap interface
Ms. Meena Kharatmal
Fri Nov 14 16:15:24 IST 2008
During our discussion, the following points were clarified by
Nagarjuna. Replies in line:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Ms. Meena Kharatmal wrote:
> I have reviewed the depmap interface from an educationist point of
> view. Below are my comments:
> the top search bar, sitemap, accessibility, contact are not dynamic. I
> think the image has superseded over it, therefore even upon clicking
> any search, it reloads the homepage.
it was observed that this happens in firefox version 2. Users who are
using firefox 3 may not notice this.
> to begin with, one proceeds from view or edit menu. at this place, it
> will be useful if a small how-to is given to understand what is a
> concept and what is an activity. one thing is not clear to me, is
> whether there is any difference between activity and a process. is
> process a concept or an activity. so this subtle distinctions can be
> clarified by a small guide below the search , which is anyways blank.
I am writing a small how-to for this.
> next when I search for any concept/activity even without selecting any
> in the circle, I get the search result. if anyways the search result
> appears, then the use of selecting whether it is a concept/activity
> can be ignored. but we may not want to do that.
this is provided just in case if users do not know whether a node is a
concept or an activity, so that it can search in the entire database. but is it really difficult to know.
> when I was adding, there is confusions, about what is depends on and
> what is required for and what is the central concept. this can be
> resolved by small examples.
I am writing a small guide for this.
> it would be useful while I am in the edit interface if I can go back
> to the search. just as there is home tag, there can be a search tag.
this can be managed.
> now while adding one cannot add the relations, because if the depends
> on and required for are not existing, then it does not make sense to
> give the forms. the small window that is opened for creating the maps,
> can also provide with add interface.
first to star with a repository has to be created. also the small
window can be provided with add button, lots of 'fancy' things that
can be doable are in pipeline. wait an watch, or they will be announced..
> now I see that the main concept that is being focussed on is at the
> middle level, which means that it can have upper level and a lower
> level. This categorization reminds me of the Markman's idea of
> children's understanding based on the basic-level categorization which
> follows with general level and then with specific level. Even Ausuble
> mentions about learning at super-ordinate and sub-ordinate level.
it seems that the general to specific level is observed in a
hierarchical map such as typemap or partmap. but in depmap
(dependencymap) since it is a networked map, it may not occur. but at
the same time the dependency relation is also semantic because it can
be assigned the properties of transitiviy, sysmetric, reflexity to it.
> now if this is the design i.e. the main concept is at the basic level,
> then it will be helpful is this idea is implemented in the design of
> the interface. this is just a suggestion. because this will be very
> useful to understand what the main or basic level concept depends on
> i.e. at the upper level or general level and for what it is required
> for i.e. at the lower level or specific level.
important point to know is that depmap is not about how to understand
a particular concept, but it is about how to create a learning path,
or a sequence for teaching.
> after creating a repository of just the concepts, then I would think
> of assigning depends on or required for. this method is better, also
> it will be useful if there is a tagging system like for instance, if I
> want to create a conceptual dependency of standard 8 on a chapter of
> cell structure and function, I can assign the relations alongwith tag
> or an attribute that this conceptual dependency map or domain is of
> grade 8 level or belongs to grade 8 chapter.
> this will also be useful for the teacher to search to see what is the
> conceptual dependency that is required for the domain at grade
> 8. therefore accordingly search for tag can be provided.
the tagging by the user is not supported because the depmap on its own
will emerge the learning sequence of conceptual dependency and thus
can help in guiding what concepts are important at grade 8 or 9 and so
> I was viewing for an exisiting concept, and in the graphical
> representation it shows some level of mappings i.e. 4-5 level above
> the main concept and 2-3 level below the main concept. This is I think
> being managed arbitrarily. Also at some level those concepts appear
> which have no relation with the basic level concept such as nuclues,
> and length of scale. this is the reason I mentioned that it is
> computing arbitrarily. in this case, if appropriate checks are
> provided or tagged then this itself can be used to provide with
> refined or constrained checks for search results.
it seems the computation is done by just one rule i.e. x depends on
y. but it is also necessary that we have a good amount of data to see
the relevant neighbourhood of concepts.
> alternatively user
> can also decide whether one wants to see the dependency upto 3 levels
> or 4 levels.
later on in user preferences such levels can be added, so that if a
user wants to see the map in 4 levels above and 5 levels below, then
the user can select these levels and view the maps by their choice.
> I think the arrow directions can be changed. to explain let us take
> the main or the basic level concept and the arrow for depends on
> should point away from it and the arrow for required for should point
> towards it. the existing directions of arrows are confusing.
the arrow is used just as a convention.
Comments are welcome.
Blogpage --> http://okeanos.wordpress.com
Homepage --> http://www.hbcse.tifr.res.in/~meena
Wikipedia ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refined_concept_map
> These are my few comments upon reviewing the interface.
> Hoping for discussion.
More information about the Community